Most people who live-stream professionally or have been doing it for a while, at least, know that to live stream, you need at least one source (usually a camera), a capture device, an encoder, and an internet connection with sufficient upload speed to get the video to the host.

What that looks like varies, though. In some set-ups, it's just a smartphone, which does all the work. In others, it's a multi-cam operation with a video switcher, graphics source, a dedicated encoder, and a crew of people to run the whole thing.

It's just as problematic to use a big set up for a "hey, I want to say hi to you from this conference and remind you about this great thing we're doing when we get back" message from the pastor as using a single smartphone in a large auditorium, from the the back of the room.

So, which should you use? Let's examine each and see when it's appropriate to use it and when you need something more flexible, more portable, more reliable, or more inexpensive.

Smartphone/tablet

In 2018, the smartphone is ubiquitous and services like Facebook and YouTube have made it easy to live stream from these devices anytime and anywhere that you have an internet connection with enough upload speed.

It's little wonder that many churches have hopped on the smartphone bandwagon, assuming that's all you need, in all situations. Sadly though, that's not true.

The smartphone of today does shoot higher resolution video that professional cameras did 15 years ago, but that's not to say they don't have limitations.

If the phone is in the back of the auditorium, it won't get as good a shot of the pastor and worship team as a professional camera with an optical zoom lens.

The biggest problem with using a smartphone (or tablet) as your only live-streaming device is flexibility. If the phone is in the back of the auditorium, it won't get as good a shot of the pastor and worship team as a professional camera with an optical zoom lens. Modern phones CAN simulate a zoom by either switching between lenses or magnifying pixels, but that's not the same thing as moving lens elements to actually magnify what you're seeing.

Since you've only got one point of view, anything that happens in another part of the room--or even another part of the platform--means that you have to break from what you're shooting in one location and move to another.

Smartphones ARE good for quick videos with minimal crew, though. In the earlier example, we discussed a quick live stream from the pastor who is at a conference and wants to check in with the congregation. Since he or she is so close to the camera and shooting such a short video, it just doesn't make sense financially or even from a production standpoint to send a crew of even two or three people to do it.

Webcam and computer

A lot of people have probably forgotten about using their computers and webcams for live streaming because it's just so easy to do with their phones, but that doesn't mean there isn't an advantage to having this set-up as an option.

Sure, he could whip out his phone and knock it out, but what if you had lights, a microphone, and webcam set up in his office?

Imagine if your children's pastor wanted to do a weekly live stream on the church's kidmin Facebook page. Sure, he could whip out his phone and knock it out, but what if you had lights, a microphone, and webcam set up in his office? He'd just need to turn it all on, connect to Facebook and start the live stream. You could get reliable sound with a better microphone, reliable lighting because it's set already, and a good background that you know is neither washed out by natural light or too dark.

It's not portable, but it doesn't need to be. It's always done from the same location, using equipment he's comfortable with.

It's not flexible either, but it doesn't need to be.

It might not be as reliable as a professional system with a crew, but it doesn't need to be.

Camera and encoder

As you move into larger rooms, a live-streaming set up with a single camera and encoder becomes a nice option to have. If no one is running it, its image could look just like a smartphone on a tripod, but if you have a camera op, that person can add different types of shots to add visual interest to the live stream.

If the encoder you're using isn't a capture card, computer and encoding software, but a small encoding appliance, like a Teradek Vidiu, it could also be quite portable too.

If the encoder you're using isn't a capture card, computer and encoding software, but a small encoding appliance, like a Teradek Vidiu, it could also be quite portable too. So, you could potentially get many of the benefits of a larger system with the portability of a smaller one (although it wouldn't be pocketable like a smartphone, it could fit easily in a piece of luggage or a backpack). The added ability to do a true zoom is really nice, and upgradeability is a nice feature, too.

Camera, encoder and graphics

So far, none of the options we've talked about really include the ability to show computer graphics like sermon notes and full-screen pictures. So if you'd want to show them, your only choice was to pan over to the projector screen (or teaching television) and zoom in to show it.

That's less than ideal since the lighting in the room might wash out a projected image or you might have glare from a teaching TV’s glossy screen.

A good way to combat this is with a system that includes a video camera captured via a capture device into a computer to be processed via software like OBS, Wirecast, vMix, etc., which can also take a feed from worship software on the same computer or another on the network.

By using a computer as an encoder you're sacrificing portability, but you're gaining another video source.

By using a computer as an encoder you're sacrificing portability, but you're gaining another video source. This is a great system for churches that have outgrown the smaller systems and want to add another level of professionalism to their live streams, perhaps even on their way to a larger one.

Multiple smartphones

If your church needs more camera angles with limited computer graphics, maybe a system comprised of multiple phones is right for you. Apps like SwitcherStudio on the iOS app store allow you to connect multiple phones over the network and use them like a multi-cam production. Your control surface is just an iPad running the software.

… this system would be great for portable churches or times when your church isn't at a dedicated location, like for retreats….

While this is less portable than a single phone, you could easily set up a three-camera live stream in just a few minutes by connecting phones to power supplies and putting them on tripods. As a result, this system would be great for portable churches or times when your church isn't at a dedicated location, like for retreats, etc.

You would have to worry about network congestion since this approach relies on WiFi, and the other downside is that some of these services do have a monthly charge, but they're a good hybrid.

Mevo

If you can get it close enough, the Mevo allows you to have a system similar to the switcher studio multiple smartphone system.

The advantage here is that you only have one camera location, but since the camera shoots 4k, but live streams in lower resolutions, you can switch from different parts of the shot, making it appear like you've got more cameras than you do.

Like some of the other systems, it's limited on computer graphics options, but portability and shot variety without having a large crew is a huge plus.

SlingStudio

If, in addition to smartphones, you want to use cameras with zoom lenses, etc., maybe the SlingStudio is right for you. Since you can connect wirelessly and control which camera you're taking with an iPad or Android tablet, it's like having a multi-camera production in a small, portable form factor.

It's not without challenges and limitations, though. Wireless is less reliable than wired. It's not apparent how to key graphics over the video sources. It also requires a wireless transmitter (at additional cost) for each new source that isn't a smartphone, after the ones included in the base package. So it can get pricey pretty fast.

Multiple cameras software switcher

If you want multiple cameras, perhaps switcher software will work for you. This gives you the advantages of multi-cam that everything from the multiple smartphone option on provide, but if you've already got the computer, it might be less expensive.

Primarily, you're going to use hard-wired connections so that increases reliability, at the expense of portability, AND there is a limit to how many capture devices your computer will support at once.

That said, it's a great step before you go to a hardware switcher.

Hardware switcher, camera, graphics, encoder

If you're content with a single camera and graphics, or just want a stepping stone before you upgrade to a full multi-cam system, you can skip the software switcher and go directly to a hardware one. The advantage here is that some of the problems inherent in software, like OS incompatibilities, viruses, malware, and the like, aren't a worry with a hardware switcher.

The advantage here is that some of the problems inherent in software, like OS incompatibilities, viruses, malware, and the like, aren't a worry with a hardware switcher.

They tend to be more expensive, starting at $1,000 and can cost 100 times that or more, but there's a reason that television stations use them instead of something that's not purpose-built. They tend to be rock-solid reliable and have a standard, tactile UI.

Multicam, switcher, graphics, encoder

Now, we're almost to the ultimate level of live production. The parts may look different, but whether it's multiple broadcast cameras, a multiple M/E switcher, a CG, and high end encoder or some cheap camcorders, an entry-level switcher, a computer with PowerPoint, and a capture device running into an entry-level encoder, both systems are built with similar (although more or less capable) parts.

This system isn't portable unless it's built into rolling racks or a live-truck, but what it lacks in portability, it makes up for in quality.

This is the system most churches would aspire to, if they viewed it as worth the investment.

Each dollar spent on the system, and there are a lot more than many of the other set-ups, gives the team that runs it more flexibility. This is the system most churches would aspire to, if they viewed it as worth the investment.

Multiple simultaneous productions

Whether it's a switcher that sends one aux to IMAG and one to the live stream, or two or more dedicated teams with their own gear, the expense of having multiple simultaneous productions is balanced by having productions tailored to each audience.

Reactions shots are distracting on IMAG, but draw remote audiences into the room. Wide shots that often don't add to the live experience, provide context for the remote audience. Even when adding a third team for recording, so you get even more wide shots for recordings intended to be watched on larger television screens rather than smaller computer and portable ones might be an option for this level of production.

There's no perfect system for all situations. What works for one won't work for all, but consider when one will be better than another and invest accordingly. Maybe that involves renting a system for special events or even hiring an outside company. Either way, try to choose the one that's right for you, keeping the needs of the audience in mind. Balance portability, flexibility, reliability, and cost for each situation and you'll have the best live stream you can get.

Tags

Paul Alan Clifford is the author of multiple church technology books, and producer of the ChurchTechCast.com network of live-streaming shows. He has served on his church's video team since 2000 in various capacities.